Should man rule over women for women’s own good?

[Esquilax]

How hard is it to write what you mean, seriously? Do you honestly expect us to believe that this stuff is just written super vague, and that only you, a guy who doesn't know the author and can tell us nothing about his intent, somehow knows what's up?

No one living today has met men like william shakespeare yet we can understand what he is saying.

The difference being that nobody today is attempting to convince me that Shakespeare had written something definitively not present in the text. Nobody is asking me to accept that when Shakespeare wrote the play "Romeo and Juliet" that the title is actually "Romeo and Juliet and Bill."

Contrast that with what you're asking me to accept in the bible, which is that the true meaning of the text is actually the precise opposite of the words in the text, that when the book says "women are to be silent and not teach," what it really means is "women can teach, just so long as they're qualified." The latter is not what's in the book, and you offer no reason why I should accept your interpretation. Frankly, a literal reading of the passage has the upper hand because at least I know that the literal reading comes officially from the text, despite everything else.

And since we know the bible is loaded with contradictions (it is. Even if you're willing to presuppose that it's all true and twist until you can reconcile it all, there's no doubt that the contradictions are at least present) then pointing to a completely different book in the canon, where both authors are completely anonymous, roughly means that you're asking me to accept that it's more likely that an adult human being writing a religious manual was so inept at communication that he figured the precise opposite of what he meant was the thing to write, rather than that it was simply two authors that weren't cooperating in their writing.

I don't know why you'd expect me to do that.

[Tonus]

Any way you can interpret the Bible in your own way, and I can interpret it another. At the end of the day it is down to whether you believe in the Bible or not. My interpretation is from a believers point of view

And you don't find that troubling? That god would write (sorry, "inspire") a book that was so poorly-written that it can be interpreted in an almost infinite number of ways, with no real way to determine which is the correct one aside from 'faith' or starting with a specific point of view?

[badlydrawngirl]

Yeah, cause Christian domestic discipline is hotttttt.

[vodkafan]

Yeah, cause Christian domestic discipline is hotttttt.

All sorts of mental pictures coming up here. What would Christian domestic discipline involve?

[Chas]

Any way you can interpret the Bible in your own way, and I can interpret it another. At the end of the day it is down to whether you believe in the Bible or not. My interpretation is from a believers point of view

You seemingly don't see what a horseshit statement that is.

If any interpretation is meaningful, then the book has no meaning.

[C4RM5]

Any way you can interpret the Bible in your own way, and I can interpret it another. At the end of the day it is down to whether you believe in the Bible or not. My interpretation is from a believers point of view

You seemingly don't see what a horseshit statement that is.

If any interpretation is meaningful, then the book has no meaning.

The book does have meaning, for example it teaches right from wrong, salvation, why suffering occurs, marriage and many other things.

[FatAndFaithless]

You seemingly don't see what a horseshit statement that is.

If any interpretation is meaningful, then the book has no meaning.

The book does have meaning, for example it teaches right from wrong, salvation, why suffering occurs, marriage and many other things.

Except if you can interpret the book in any way you like, as you've said, then anything it says about "right and wrong" is utterly relative and largely useless, since two people could reach the opposite conclusion on any given problem. Example: Homosexuality. Some Christians say homosexuality is disordered, some Christians say homosexuality is not a disorder. They both can't be right.

[C4RM5]

The book does have meaning, for example it teaches right from wrong, salvation, why suffering occurs, marriage and many other things.

Except if you can interpret the book in any way you like, as you've said, then anything it says about "right and wrong" is utterly relative and largely useless, since two people could reach the opposite conclusion on any given problem. Example: Homosexuality. Some Christians say homosexuality is disordered, some Christians say homosexuality is not a disorder. They both can't be right.

Somethings are up for debate are arguement. Others are set in stone and can't really be interpreted any differently. This would be things such as salvation. Others, like homosexual marriage are debatable but it states clearly in the Bible homosexuality is a sin. Where I live homosexuality is not legal. This doesn't mean I view homosexuals with disrespect, I view them as equal. The Bible doesn't say certain sins are worse than others, everyone is the same.

[FatAndFaithless]

Except if you can interpret the book in any way you like, as you've said, then anything it says about "right and wrong" is utterly relative and largely useless, since two people could reach the opposite conclusion on any given problem. Example: Homosexuality. Some Christians say homosexuality is disordered, some Christians say homosexuality is not a disorder. They both can't be right.

Somethings are up for debate are arguement. Others are set in stone and can't really be interpreted any differently. This would be things such as salvation. Others, like homosexual marriage are debatable but it states clearly in the Bible homosexuality is a sin. Where I live homosexuality is not legal. This doesn't mean I view homosexuals with disrespect, I view them as equal. The Bible doesn't say certain sins are worse than others, everyone is the same.

Many, many Christians would disagree with you, and point to the same book for evidence. How do you determine who is right, if your book supposedly has the clear answer spelled out? And if it's not clearly spelled out, why not? If a god-inspired book wanted to pass down wisdom, surely God could've constructed it in a much, much clearer way.

[C4RM5]

Somethings are up for debate are arguement. Others are set in stone and can't really be interpreted any differently. This would be things such as salvation. Others, like homosexual marriage are debatable but it states clearly in the Bible homosexuality is a sin. Where I live homosexuality is not legal. This doesn't mean I view homosexuals with disrespect, I view them as equal. The Bible doesn't say certain sins are worse than others, everyone is the same.

Many, many Christians would disagree with you, and point to the same book for evidence. How do you determine who is right, if your book supposedly has the clear answer spelled out? And if it's not clearly spelled out, why not? If a god-inspired book wanted to pass down wisdom, surely God could've constructed it in a much, much clearer way.

I guess God does everything for a reason and I am not in a position to question. Also I said others debate about it but I have never seen I Bible quote saying homosexuality was right. Finally to be Christian you have to believe God sent his son to die on the cross, that is not debatable among christians. Stating Jesus did not exist means you are not a Christian.